I'm afraid I'll go against the majority on here and say I honestly don't have a problem with Legard at all. OK, he rambles and "charges" and "goes up hill's" but I don't find that irritating.

Truth is if Legard is replaced by, say Charlie Cox for argument's sake, he will be moaned about at the same level because it's the Internet. Forums will still be full of people complaining about the commentary because that what forums are for. There aren't many forum's made to congratulate people, only to criticise. I also think people underestimate how difficult commentary is. I've tried with the sound down and I either run out of breath or go into ultrasonic, which upsets the dog next door. Murray made it sound so effortless, but Allen and Legard clearly A) don't have his experience and B) don't have his skill. There will never be another Murray Walker and I think people need to accept that. Yes, there is better than Legard (Ben Edwards for example) and, in my view, there is worse (Carlton Kirby), but we can't always have the best all of the time. The discussions I've read through (Digital Spy, BBC and here) show there isn't one popular consensus (probably with the exception of Ben Edwards) so the Forum moaning will still continue.

Whatever you think of Legard, just take a minute to think about Martin Brundle in all of this. If the Daily Mail is accurate (stranger things have happened) what gives him the right to dictate to his bosses who to employee/sack? If that's true, my opinion of him has just shot through the floor. He's the ex-driver invited by the BBC. Legard is the commentator employed by the BBC. Brundle doesn't have a right to throw his substantial weight around. Yes he has to stand there with Legard but even still, he is a professional. Get on with it Martin instead of backstabbing. If Legard wasn't aware of Brundle's opinion before, the commentary in Singapore is going to be veryfrosty indeed.

I'm afraid I'll go against the majority on here and say I honestly don't have a problem with Legard at all. OK, he rambles and "charges" and "goes up hill's" but I don't find that irritating.

Truth is if Legard is replaced by, say Charlie Cox for argument's sake, he will be moaned about at the same level because it's the Internet. Forums will still be full of people complaining about the commentary because that what forums are for. There aren't many forum's made to congratulate people, only to criticise. I also think people underestimate how difficult commentary is. I've tried with the sound down and I either run out of breath or go into ultrasonic, which upsets the dog next door. Murray made it sound so effortless, but Allen and Legard clearly A) don't have his experience and B) don't have his skill. There will never be another Murray Walker and I think people need to accept that. Yes, there is better than Legard (Ben Edwards for example) and, in my view, there is worse (Carlton Kirby), but we can't always have the best all of the time. The discussions I've read through (Digital Spy, BBC and here) show there isn't one popular consensus (probably with the exception of Ben Edwards) so the Forum moaning will still continue.

Whatever you think of Legard, just take a minute to think about Martin Brundle in all of this. If the Daily Mail is accurate (stranger things have happened) what gives him the right to dictate to his bosses who to employee/sack? If that's true, my opinion of him has just shot through the floor. He's the ex-driver invited by the BBC. Legard is the commentator employed by the BBC. Brundle doesn't have a right to throw his substantial weight around. Yes he has to stand there with Legard but even still, he is a professional. Get on with it Martin instead of backstabbing. If Legard wasn't aware of Brundle's opinion before, the commentary in Singapore is going to be veryfrosty indeed.

Thanks all for reading through my first rambling post.

Do some reading, the problem with Legard is not the mistakes - its the fact hes got absolutely no knowledge of the sport, or how to read a race. Whats worse is he has no desire to learn - he keeps out of the Forum because "its a place for the experts" - he doesn't want to learn.Last weekend he was still getting excited about purple sector times right at the very start of the session.. he simply does not understand.

The stuff that appeared in the DM is hearsay and nothing more, at this moment in time there is no proof at all that Brundle wants Legard out.In terms of Brundle "throwing his weight around" as you put it, keep in mind that Martin is very popular, his gridwalks are legendary. He also works well with the rest of the team - something Legard can't be bothered to do.Brundle started doing F1 for the BBC at the same time as Legard, quite where you get this "he was invited" thing from I don't know - he is employed by the BBC (directly or indirectly) just like Legard and is doing a far better job.

Brundle started doing F1 for the BBC at the same time as Legard, quite where you get this "he was invited" thing from I don't know - he is employed by the BBC (directly or indirectly) just like Legard and is doing a far better job.

What I meant was that Brundle wasn't a BBC employee to start with, Legard was doing it on the radio from 1997 to 2004 and was a BBC employee before the BBC won the rights and decided to offer the co-commentator job to Brundle.

I'm afraid I'll go against the majority on here and say I honestly don't have a problem with Legard at all. OK, he rambles and "charges" and "goes up hill's" but I don't find that irritating.

Truth is if Legard is replaced by, say Charlie Cox for argument's sake, he will be moaned about at the same level because it's the Internet. Forums will still be full of people complaining about the commentary because that what forums are for. There aren't many forum's made to congratulate people, only to criticise. I also think people underestimate how difficult commentary is. I've tried with the sound down and I either run out of breath or go into ultrasonic, which upsets the dog next door. Murray made it sound so effortless, but Allen and Legard clearly A) don't have his experience and B) don't have his skill. There will never be another Murray Walker and I think people need to accept that. Yes, there is better than Legard (Ben Edwards for example) and, in my view, there is worse (Carlton Kirby), but we can't always have the best all of the time. The discussions I've read through (Digital Spy, BBC and here) show there isn't one popular consensus (probably with the exception of Ben Edwards) so the Forum moaning will still continue.

Whatever you think of Legard, just take a minute to think about Martin Brundle in all of this. If the Daily Mail is accurate (stranger things have happened) what gives him the right to dictate to his bosses who to employee/sack? If that's true, my opinion of him has just shot through the floor. He's the ex-driver invited by the BBC. Legard is the commentator employed by the BBC. Brundle doesn't have a right to throw his substantial weight around. Yes he has to stand there with Legard but even still, he is a professional. Get on with it Martin instead of backstabbing. If Legard wasn't aware of Brundle's opinion before, the commentary in Singapore is going to be veryfrosty indeed.

Thanks all for reading through my first rambling post.

In response:

• People are quite capable of forming their own opinions. Because the vast majority are negative it doesn't mean they are automatically wrong because they are on a forum, or because they all agree. • Other commentators are generally praised - Edwards, Croft, Brundle. There would be plenty of negative Croft comments if he was generally regarded as poor, but he is deemed to be far from it.• There's no evidence of Brundle saying or doing anything. He just turns up to work and might have a great time with Legard in the bar afterwards. All that matters is the way they appear to work together, which can only be reflected in the output they produce.• They'll never be a fundamentally accepted commentary, but that's no excuse for not trying to get the best person you possibly can. Legard's ability is plain to hear and we all know what makes a good commentator. Other sports seem to have a plethora of decent commentators who demonstrate the skills that Legard lacks. Football commentators are generally excellent - I can't think of many that have the failings Legard possesses (stuttered and fragmented sentences, and tedious diatribe for example). There must be plenty of undiscovered Karun Chandhoks and Jason Platos out there who would suit a commentary role.

I don't know much about most of the people listed, but I hope it will be someone calm and knowledgeable. I hate it when commentators get carried away, or over-excited, and start shouting. It's why I didn't watch much sport when I was growing up ... there seemed to be an era when commentators sounded as if they were wetting themselves with excitement, and you were wishing someone would just take a tranquilliser gun to them and give us all a bit of piece and quiet so we could focus on the action and maybe form some of our own opinions.

Absolutely, he was always going to have trouble filling Muddly's boots - the man wasn't just a commentator, he's a legend - THE voice of motorsport.So I was prepared to cut JA some slack and he wasn't that awful, I just got fed up with the Goooooooooo! and his sycophancic style.The way he used questions that he patently knew the answer to in order to educate the viewer really got on my wick - "Tell me Martin, what do they mean by tyres?" Just ask MB to talk about the tyres, rather than making yourself sound like a berk FFS!So I find the Leg less irritating, even though he indeed seems clueless half the time. The argument is down to personal tase and as such nobody and everybody is right.

The way he used questions that he patently knew the answer to in order to educate the viewer really got on my wick - "Tell me Martin, what do they mean by tyres?" Just ask MB to talk about the tyres, rather than making yourself sound like a berk FFS!

What have the beeb got to lose by letting brundle have a crack at lead comentator?
Bring in a more recent f1 driver to join him at the start of next year,or maybe the
last couple of races this year, if it doesnt work, it doesnt work.
They can still bring in edwards or whoever (not allen).

What have the beeb got to lose by letting brundle have a crack at lead comentator?Bring in a more recent f1 driver to join him at the start of next year,or maybe thelast couple of races this year, if it doesnt work, it doesnt work.They can still bring in edwards or whoever (not allen).

Sorry to be off topic but cool Depailler pic. An incredibly underrated driver if there ever was one.

What have the beeb got to lose by letting brundle have a crack at lead comentator?Bring in a more recent f1 driver to join him at the start of next year,or maybe thelast couple of races this year, if it doesnt work, it doesnt work.They can still bring in edwards or whoever (not allen).

I see no reason why it couldn't work. Ex players dominate cricket commentating for example.

I don't mind Charlie Cox, but he would get on the nerves of 99% of the people on the boards with his "he's got the magnets on", "across the stripe" banter, just as much as the Leg's "up the hill", "on a charge" stuff. Also Toby Moody and Julian Ryder make Cox and Parrish look like amateurs on the Moto GP. Would love to see Toby get the F1 gig but just can't see it, and wouldn't want him taken away from the bikes!

The only reason Cox would get the job over Edwards or Moody is because he's a BBC man, much the same reason why Legard got the gig in the first place.

I don't mind Charlie Cox, but he would get on the nerves of 99% of the people on the boards with his "he's got the magnets on", "across the stripe" banter, just as much as the Leg's "up the hill", "on a charge" stuff...

Most of us have already heard Edwards commentating on F1, champcar, and just about anything with wheels. I doubt F1 would ever be that action packed, and try and imagine Legard attempting to commentate on the clip you just posted.